NETSCOUT nGeniusONE Reviews

We use the solution when our customers have problems with their databases or communications. We use it to look at packages and packets and verify the behaviour of the NOC, the server, and the traffic, looking for a pattern that might identify the issue and what's happening now.

We started using the product because our customers had some problems with the network. We made changes to the network and made it stable. However, the customer told us there were still some errors. Then the people from the database told us the problem was the network, not the database. The only way to verify it was the database and not the network was by putting a sniffer in it. And that's why we use NETSCOUT.

The new version of the solution is like a grid, onto which we can put traffic and graph its behaviour for a certain amount of time. We can then use the behaviour, from one or two hours or maybe seven days, or 30 days. Looking at the results, allows us to verify whether anything is wrong. 

There is a big issue with the special way they use InfiniStream to store data. The InfiniStream has a certain capacity. So our customer centre asks why we don't store all the information that uses InfiniStream in Vblock or something like that. And NETSCOUT says that we need to store those data in a special way. And we use a special appliance called InfiniStream. So this kind of storage is not so big. For example, our customer has saved all the data, restored all the information, and backed it up elsewhere. For example, if something happened in the past month, we can see the package because the storage is a kind of FIFO. So we have a very limited space to see the previous days.

We've been using this solution for about six years.

The product is very good. We have very few problems. And if we do have any issues,  NETSCOUT gives us very good support. They have the right engineers that know the issues. And if anything is wrong with a device, you get an RMA. 

The solution is as scalable as we or our customer wish. But we don't plan to increase the usage for the moment because of the expense.

We have six people using the solution. 

We currently need three guys to deploy the solution and one to maintain it.

Tech support is good. We don't have any problem with that. I opened one case, and they solved it.

Positive

The initial setup was complex because we needed to know the package's source and destination when we tried to monitor certain conversations. So when we are tracing something or trying to fix one issue or error, we need to know precisely how the communication is, where the sources and the destinations are, etc. So we need to talk with the person that develops the applications, the database, and the network. , we need to know specifically the part of the network the package is going through. With all this information and with NETSCOUT, we can very easily solve the issue or try to find the error, but for specific communication.

When we started with the customer, NETSCOUT directly supported us with the implementation. And after that, we were all on our own. 

It took us six months to deploy the product.

I don't know exactly how the licencing works. I think it's about the ports from InfiniStream. For example, if you have five InfiniStreams, each InfiniStream has four ports, so I think you need to acquire a licence for 20 nodes.

We can get everything in a bundle. But the price is different if you acquire virtual InfiniStream or vSTREAM. But in the end, the price is only for acquisition; it's not a licence. The license is for the ports, one per InfiniStream.

I advise anyone wanting to use the solution to have one completely dedicated engineer. Here in Mexico, we have one engineer who's essential in many things. When a company acquires NETSCOUT, they need specific people responsible only for that and not involved with anything else.

On a scale of one to 10, I would give NETSCOUT nGeniusONE nine.

We have an extended operations team in India with engineers running the day-to-day tools to monitor around 150 sites across the globe. We have the MPLS and DIA for the bandwidth initiation. If there is a bandwidth alert, the engineers will look into it and take the necessary actions.

It is mostly deployed on-prem. We have a few NETSCOUT applications (five percent) that we have moved off to the AWS Cloud. We were in the process of migrating one of our data centers to the cloud. We just started working on that.

We have a direct internet connection (DIA) on most of the sites and nGeniusONE helped us with reviewing bandwidth depletion from the sites. Most of them were utilizing like 30 Mbps, but we were adding 100 Mbps. We went and collected data from all the sites using nGeniusONE, then we initiated a project for refacing the Mbps bandwidth, which gave us business revenue improvements. We reduced most of the sites' bandwidth and a lot of our spending (on unused bandwidth). This solution has saved us more than $50,000 a month and freed up 30 percent of our bandwidth.

It's able to give me real-time data. We were working on a project a couple of days ago where we were able to compare the nGeniusONE data and the packet data. Initially, the network team was using the nGeniusONE tool. However, right now, most application owners and the application team have access to nGeniusONE. They want to see how the application performs under real-time. Therefore, we are definitely moving towards have the application team use it as well. The management is also really happy.

Especially with the pandemic situation, we asked most users to work from home. We set up a lot of SSL VPN clients on the AWS Cloud. We were just using the nGeniusONE to monitor the bandwidth and the packet flow to the data center. Then, users were reporting a lot of issues connecting through the SSL VPN client. So, we did some analysis using nGeniusONE. We tweaked and removed a lot of the bottlenecks, allowing the user to work from home comfortably. We also set it up AWS cloud to give us more back and forth data and users connected through SSL VPN. Based on that, we increased the licensing count on the SSL VPN because we saw a lot of users connecting through one region's VPN. Therefore, nGeniusONE has definitely helped us a lot during this pandemic time.

This solution is good about providing us with increased visibility while conducting an IT deployment. We set up a lot of wireless connections for our R&D users to get real-time data across the globe when they access the data center. nGeniusONE showed us how the traffic is going through the MPLS, and we can move that traffic to the DIA.

Using the nGeniousONE, we found out that most of our sites were not marking the traffic. Therefore, we took the packet capture from nGeniusONE to Cisco and worked with them to fix it.

We use it VoIP, video, and monitoring the contact center application performance. It has helped us with uptime and the user experience.

The salary dashboards and contributions are the most valuable features. The graph tells you an application's performance. On the graph, it will tell you the bandwidth for a particular site. Therefore, it is so easy for us to go and look up.

If a lot of traffic from one site is hitting AWS Cloud or the data center, then we want to know which client is utilizing the most bandwidth. We will work with nGeniusONE to troubleshoot the issue.

The learning curve is definitely good. We used to have quarterly training. Most of my team members in India enlisted for training and have attended it.

Initially, we were having a lot of issues with bugs when using version 6.1.1. There were a lot of problems with the dashboard causing confusion. We worked with our SE and the NETSCOUT engineering team to fix the visibility with the data. There should be a patch release to fix this issue. However, this seems to be working fine for us right now after the 6.2.2 upgrade. 

Almost five years.

If you rank from one to 10, I would give it a nine for stability. It is a really stable tool.

nGeniusONE increased our application and network uptime. nGeniusONE is pretty quick and stable. Whenever the Internet goes down, it will automatically alert us. Then, the team will immediately work on fixing it with the service provider, like CenturyLink. The network uptime has increase by 20 to 30 percent.

There is a 10 member team dedicated to maintenance of the solution.

Scalable is fine. The licensing part is not hard-coded with the server. Whenever we want to increase the licenses, we just talk to our NETSCOUT agent again. We'll get more licensing and keep it going. So, it is definitely a scalable solution.

We have around 160 users accessing this tool per month. 20 percent of the users are the admin team who manage the tool. they just log into the tool and check application performance.

We have on a dedicated engineer from NETSCOUT who works on our projects. He is always available on-call if there is a new site deployment going on. I can call him on his work number, even on weekends, and he'll always be available. This is something that we worked out in our licensing.

We were using a different vendor product (Riverbed Cascade) before nGeniusONE. After the nGeniusONE implementation, the time to resolve a ticket and the time to identify an issue were pretty quick. With nGeniusONE implemented on all 150 of our sites, we now have real-time packet collection, a probe on all our sites that collects the data, and historical data for the past three months that can be graphically represented. These are all advantages compared to our previous solution.

We found nGeniusONE gave us more visibility for application and performance management than Riverbed.

The initial setup was straightforward. We used to buy all our devices in North America, then ship them across the globe. A couple of the site setups were tough, but it is fine now.

The initial deployment took six months. Then, we started slowly rolling out to different regions, like EMEA and APAC. The overall complete nGeniusONE solution post-deployment took us 15 to 18 months to complete. The extended time frame was because we started buying five to six probes every quarter, then repeated the process. We did not purchase all the devices at once. That was the company's vision.

The initial deploy took us 15 days or a month. We would just set it up inside one of our data centers and the install probes.

I worked directly with the NETSCOUT SE. The deployment takes one SE from NETSCOUT and three engineers from our side.

We have all the NETSCOUT products, and everything is controlled through nGeniusONE, like PULSE Server, Collector, etc. This has saved us money because we don't have to go and purchase a different server or management tool for nGeniusONE.

It does automatic discovery, but we are not doing it because we couldn't configure the application. The plan is to use this more in the future.

We are focusing on the different products from NETSCOUT right now. We have started installing PFS switches on most sites. We just did a PoC where we are planning to roll PFS to 10 of our sites in upcoming quarter.

We haven't integrated nGeniusONE with other solutions.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of 10.

The solution helps to troubleshoot and put our hands on the weak points of customer networks. 

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE's pricing is higher compared to the competitors. It is more than 15-18 percent of competitor costs. It also needs to add AI features. 

I have been working with the solution for eight to nine months. 

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE is stable. 

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE's tech support is good. 

Positive

The tool's installation is straightforward if you are familiar with the product. It is complex if you don't have user training. 

The solution suits enterprise customers. Small businesses will find the cost high and the tool's capability unsuitable. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for data center troubleshooting and performance analysis.

The solution is stable and works best for collecting and analyzing metrics data.

They should include an application coloring feature for firewall in the solution.

We have been using the solution for 17 years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.

We have 30 solution users in our organization. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution's initial setup process is complicated as multiple managers, applications, and protocols are involved. It takes one or two hours for each device. We require a team of four engineers for maintenance as well.

The solution generates a return on investment for us. It works efficiently to find the root cause of errors.

We have a premium customized contract for the solution. So, it has all the features we require. There are no additional expenses.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a ten out of ten.

We are a telco company and we are using nGeniusONE to do a survey of our core network. We created different services based on nodes and based on services like VoLTE and the like. Our use cases are mainly to provide KPIs and to detect anomalies in case of an issue in the network.

Before we were pretty weak in network KPIs. That's the area where we have improved as a result of the solution, based on the service.

The solution transforms packet wire data into real-time data that is actionable. It helps us with faster detection of issues and allows us to create alerts.

It also provides the right people in our company with the right information in a single pane of glass view. There is always a place for improvement, but it does so. We have created a special dashboard for different teams so that each team has a relevant dashboard for the system.

In addition, nGeniusONE provides us with increased visibility while conducting an IT deployment. When we are launching a new node or a new application, it gives us a way to check that traffic has moved from one node to the other and that we still have the same level of traffic and the same success ratios.

It also helps us to get to root cause quickly, for sure, with the drill-down. If we see an issue on a KPI or we have an alert, we drill down to get into the special cases — tracing and that kind of thing — to detect the root cause.

Using nGeniusONE for unified communication application performance for VoIP helps us with uptime and user experience. We can see, for a given call, if it is a one-way or there are gaps.

The main feature, for us, is the dashboard. That is the main way we are using the solution to detect issues and to create alarms.

The drill-down is definitely interesting.

We are also using another tool from NETSCOUT, for tracing, called Iris Session Analyzer.

The solution's ability to transform packet wire data into well-structured contextual data works pretty well. But sometimes we've had issues because when we want to present some KPIs, not all the formats are available at the same time. When we think it would be better to present a KPI in a certain way, that means we have to remove another presentation. For example, there was a point in GTP where we were creating services on nodes and after that we wanted to have services on APN. We can't have both. That should come with the next release, but we are still not on version 6.3. So there are some limitations with these types of things. When we would like to use a feature, we have to remove another one. For me it's a bit of a drawback. I'm a bit frustrated with it. I would like to have everything, at all times.

For me, it would also be good to be able to split the system. For example, I would like a user to have rights for some probes but not the same rights for other probes. I'm thinking about a laboratory where we have probes and I would like to give all the rights in the laboratory to all users. I would like to have everything in the same system. We have users who can use both production and the laboratory but we aren't always able to specify that a user has access to only this part of the installation, or the hardware, while another user has access to another part. I would like to give a user rights to see everything in one part, but to have limitations in other parts, due to data protection.

Otherwise, the product is efficient and we are able to do most of the work which is required.

I have been using NETSCOUT nGeniusONE for about five years.

The stability could be a bit better. We are working right now to find solutions to improve the stability and we are in discussions with NETSCOUT about that.

The solution's distributed architecture, in terms of being both lightweight and scalable, is pretty good. The ability to distribute the solution is good. We have more and more use cases with virtualized systems, so we need a way to be able to distribute the solution on different clouds and sites.

There are about 100 users.

Previously we were using Tektronix, and that became NETSCOUT. We took nGeniusONE to improve our ability to detect issues. We were mainly working with a tracing system and nGeniusONE brought us more network visibility, with KPIs based on the network itself, and on the traffic in the network.

The initial setup was pretty complex. For me it was complex to configure everything as needed to be efficient: to get all the data, to have some reliability, and some confidence in the data quality. It was time-consuming. We need to understand what was possible, what was the best solution for evaluating a service, etc.

In one sense, the deployment is a never ending story, because each year we have new services and we need more capacity. We are always implementing new things. But the initial deployment itself took us almost a year.

In terms of our experience with NETSCOUT's customer support during deployment and post deployment, here are two levels. The first level was their people who are in direct contact with us and that level was good. When they needed support from development and R&D, at that level we had some quite long delays, at times, and the response was less good.

As for the learning curve, when people are used to working with the system, it's okay. At the beginning we had some training, but now, if a new colleague comes in, we can train him internally. We help colleagues on different teams by giving them training. With one day of training, you can already provide a lot of hints and information. After that, people need to learn by doing.

When it comes to administration, there are three of us who are mainly involved, but it's not 100 percent of the time for any of us. It might be the equivalent of one FTE. I'm a network engineer and I'm mainly involved in the monitoring and probing of new applications. When new services come out I work on increasing the capacity and evolving the system. So I'm not the main user working each day with it.

We have worked directly with a NETSCOUT consultant. We have a reseller, but direct contact with NETSCOUT is very important for me.

We needed this type of a solution. Without it we are fully blind. We can't even launch a service without one solution or another. We needed to put something in place, but I don't have figures or a monetary value for ROI. It gives us visibility.

The pricing is fair.

We have a yearly agreement that covers extensions, etc. There are no additional costs.

We didn't evaluate other solutions much because we already had a probe installed with Tektronix. NETSCOUT was quite a natural way to extend what already existed. We decided not to remove everything that was in place, but to extend instead.

It's a good tool. You need to have a clear view of what you need before you evaluate the system.

Automatic discovery and mapping of client-server relationships is not something we are using much, because we are more at the level of the network and a bit less at the level of all the servers and the internet application server.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using nGeniusONE is that to get good results from the system, you need good knowledge of the network. The system will, for sure, help to find issues, but it's not possible to have someone working with it, someone who doesn't know the network, and have that person fully use this type of system.

Presently, our use case is general network usage. Also, we employ the use of the ASI extender for specific unique protocols to our company.

I use the NETSCOUT nGeniusONE product with the ATA plugin.

We use it every day for triaging of events. We can eliminate whether or not the network was at fault within a matter of minutes. Because the network team always gets blamed for slowness or something not working, so we always have that evidence putting that to bed.

The solution provides the right people in our organization with the right information in a single pane of glass view. We can point it based as a service if we want to or specify user access as to who needs it, then they can grab it when they need to.

A lot of times we can see the issue without going to a PCAP, whether there is an error code in the service monitor drill down. For other apps, we do have to go to a PCAP, but we can identify that. Our team has been pretty well-trained in that as to what to look for.

We do have unified communication (UC) application performance enabled. We don't use it a lot. We haven't had a lot of use cases go to it. We do have a dashboard that runs and looks at our overall MOS scores for our phones. We have seen it in a use case where in previous versions we had a situation analysis alert that pointed to some inappropriately configured QoS mappings on a switchboard through a drill down. So, we have used it to isolate certain problems. However, these days with a lot of calls traversing mobile phones and stuff like that, UC has become a little bit of the norm for some expected QoS mismatches.

We use ASI extenders the most, other than just general PCAP retrieval. This allows us to build a service monitor while remaining within the confines of an NDA with a vendor.

The solution provides automatic discovery and mapping of client-server relationships. It is a good way to isolate down if you have a specific link that is not doing well. We haven't run into that. Looking at it, you can see the potential if you had something that you needed to drill down to, such as, a specific link or issue that you might have.

I have another app that we use for traditional universal monitoring, where I have more features in the dashboard than I have in the grid. This is regarding TCP Zero Window. That could stand some additional improvement. 

The ability to generate reports and run a report based on a specific host that might be having an issue. Right now, you have to do a drill down in order to find it. Whereas, if that was presented upfront, that would save a lot of time.

In previous versions, we used to have an icon on the dashboard when the situation analysis would present an alert. It would be nice if that would be made available on the dashboard again. Something that could be customizable to only illuminate on certain applications.

The solution transforms packet wire data into real-time data that is ready to act on. It provides stability where we can drill down into it. It gives us a good view. It would be nice if the cache could be a bit more responsive.

I have been using nGeniusONE since it was tooled as a product in 2013. The company has used the nGenius platform since 2007 when NETSCOUT acquired Network General.

For the most part, it's relatively stable. However, there are some times where it seems like it runs a little slow and you have to reset things to get it back going again. My other comment is on NetFlow is a lot of times in order to pick up new devices, I have to do a restart on the respective NetFlow collecting server. 

I do the deployment and maintenance of this solution.

The scalability is a good thing.

I have about 50 users who are technicians.

Their technical support does a pretty good job. If I open a ticket, I usually get a response relatively quickly. Sometimes, my problems are rather complex, but they do continue to stay on top of things and follow up as things go.

Reach out to the teams and make sure you let them know specifically what you're looking for. My sales team has pretty much just told me, "I'm not going to sell you anything that I don't think you need. So, make sure you're upfront with what your objective is that you need to achieve."

A lot of things that I've picked up are when I've attended the annual ENGAGE processes or ENGAGE seminars. I've been to several of them. While some of them are kind of intuitive, generally some good webinars would be fantastic. I think there's one coming up next month on something. Getting down to the bare bones would be good. There is stuff posted, but it is more of your sales engineer kind of showing you around.

When I was first hired on, we had one InfiniStream. We've had those ever since.

We stood up the server probably within a couple of hours.

We started out as in InfiniStreams, and it was mainly for pulling PCAPs. Then, through the acquisitions, migration, and enhancements to the product, it's evolved into a totally integrated single platform that integrates InfiniStreams and NetFlow collectors, and now ATA.

If I had to start all over again from scratch, it would take some time to do the initial setup. In regards to the dependencies that are needed if you're building a server from scratch, specifically if you're building a NETSCOUT server, then you're going to have to put in a lot of packages that have nothing to do with the system. Like case in point, ABRT is a package that's required, but it's a Red Hat automatic bug reporting tool, which isn't necessary for the operation of the product. It should simply come out with just the basic package requirements, and that's all that's required. It should not enforce it on an install.

This solution provides us with increased visibility while conducting an IT deployment. We have used it to monitor when we are doing troubleshooting steps and looking for spikes.

Back in 2007, when we got the initial nGenius system, we did have NETSCOUT pro service come over and give me some pointers on specific configurations on InfiniStreams and some service building. Then, it did taper off for a while because NETSCOUT didn't offer it, and I pretty much learned a lot of it on my own.

Our experience with their consultant was very good. He was very helpful and definitely would give his input. He would explain certain things, "This is what this is for. This is what you should do to create a better view."

We have seen ROI. We've saved a lot of time in triaging. We have found root cause identities on packet captures and have been able to feed that information back to a specific vendor, because a lot of our technology is emerging. So, we're able to give that feedback to our vendors and have them solve the problems that they need to fix, and they have the evidence to do so.

We have seen a measurable decrease in mean time to know (MTTK). It does depend on the use case. If we're looking for something that is slowing our network down, we usually will find our top talker within minutes. Our MTTK is probably a little more important for us, because then they know how to remedy it from there.

Make sure you get the low down on your licensing and understand the licensing requirements before making a purchase, especially when it comes to an upgrade. Make sure that it suits your needs before you commit to it. For example, we purchased ATA at version 6.2.1. At that time, the licensing covered everything we need. NETSCOUT comes out with 6.2.2, stating that in order to upgrade, you had to purchase CyberStream licensing. Now that requires some additional funding from both a capital investment and a maintenance cost. That's something that should have been said, "Well, if you want these additional features, you will need to purchase these CyberStreams." Otherwise, we should be allowed to continue on the basic operations as it is now through the newer releases without being stuck.

We did a head-to-head with Network Instruments. We found that their product wasn't as stable as InfiniStream due to the fact that it was using a Windows based operating system, which was a big red flag.

The solution’s ability to transform packet wire data into well-structured, contextual data is not too bad.

The solution increased our application and network uptime. We have used this tool to view where we have inefficiencies, places where there is wasted bandwidth. We have had areas where we have solved certain bandwidth issues by more than 50 percent. Others would be somewhat negligible on a larger pipe, but there are some things that we have resolved rather quickly.

I don't have plans to increase nGeniusONE as of yet, but there may be something in the process. I'm presently running seven back-end servers and, between InfiniStreams and NetFlow collectors, about 20 appliances.

Biggest lesson learnt: Packets don't lie.

I would give the solution an eight out of 10.

We have multiple use cases such as for remote locations, the monitoring of critical applications, and the WAN network. Apart from that, we use it for security alerts, to give us visibility into unknown traffic. I used to do integration with multiple different platforms to monitor critical storage sites for the business. 

Those are the key factors so that we can identify what traffic is passing across our remote sites.

If an outage happens, the tool helps us to identify the performance of the specific application and enables us to identify the issue. It helps improve our mean time to repair.

nGeniusONE has also been able to reduce outage time. Whenever there is an outage, it's quickly able to identify it and, without pointing fingers, we can prove that it is not the network environment. It helps us understand there is another reason and helps us move towards other areas for troubleshooting and fixing issues. That's a major factor where the tool is helping in applications that have the most business impact. We're able to diagnose and fix issues at the earliest, while avoiding large outage times and the associated business loss.

The solution transforms packet wire data into real-time data that is ready to act on. That's great for our multiple network services because it provides more insight into aggregation areas, and gives a unified view of the applications. From the application point of view, ultimately we need to discover the applications and configure it and then explore the options. This is a difference between network services and application services, but I'm most involved with network services.

It also definitely provides the right people in our organization with the right information in a single-pane-of-glass view. That's 100 percent true. We have different infrastructures from different vendors. If we had just Cisco, for example, we would only need to focus on the different Cisco tools. But with Bluecoat or Symantec, we need to focus on their tools. Because of TCP/IP, we can measure all the packet data in a single dashboard and we can show it in a single, unified view of all different infrastructures.

Another advantage is the increased visibility while conducting an IT deployment. Wherever we have the internet streams running across, we can see the entire site; what is happening and what other things are going on. We get more insight from the usual wired or wireless data.

Using it we also get to root cause quickly. We have massive business transactions happening continuously during the Christmas season. We were able to have increased traffic loads. However, the business transactions were also dependent on our vendors. If a vendor was unable to handle that much traffic load, we were able to prove, with the help of nGenius' reporting module, what number of transactions were crossing the network and which ones the vendor rejected.

We have also seen an increase in application uptime. For one or two applications it's 50 to 60 percent better.

And to some extent it has consolidated tools, however not at the application level. Rather, it has done so at the TCP or packet level. The consolidation has definitely saved us money, on the order of 20 to 30 percent.

In addition, when it comes to visibility across IT silos, the solution helps to bridge the gap between the application folks and the network folks. The network folks have always been siloed within the network infrastructure, and the application folks have also been siloed in the different components. NETSCOUT helps to bring every team into the single pane of glass to identify and isolate who is missing data across the applications or the infrastructure.

It's a consolidated, single tool that talks to multiple platforms. It's not vendor-proprietary; it's independent. Its provides interoperability with different products, whether they are routing products, switching products, wireless, wired, load balancing, or proxy. It works with anything you can name. 

It's TCP/IP-based which is helpful for us to interact with any TCP/IP platform and capture the data and provide visibility to the teams.

The solution’s ability to transform packet wire data into well-structured, contextual data,
on a scale of one to 10, is an eight, because it supports that interoperability. There is no dependency on a specific vendor or platform. It interacts with multiple vendors. That's a key factor that other tools are not able to provide. We have other tools within our environment, but this tool helps us to collect the packet data and transform it into a more readable, graphical format. That helps us make a quick decision within any type of project.

I would like to see improvement in the user experience. It's hard to manage it. We need a dedicated, highly-qualified person, compared to similar tools. Obviously, it's in a higher bracket, salary-wise. That's something the NETSCOUT team needs to focus on. It's a completely niche-skill technology, where we need to have the skills to manage, maintain, and deploy it.

When it comes to implementation, if they could provide some templates or some suggestions it would be helpful because this is a complex solution. Perhaps NETSCOUT could offer predefined Professional Services through which they could guide companies. In our scenario, I and my team have complete expertise for most of the things that are involved, and we were able to do it. But for other companies, if NETSCOUT could come up with some templates or some guidelines in Professional Services, it would be great in helping to get the solution deployed.

I have been using NETSCOUT nGeniusONE for more than six years.

The solution is great. It's a solid rock.

From the solution point of view, the licensing and architecture are scalable, but for hardware, when there is physical infrastructure, they probably need to improve on large-scale deployment. They need to focus on how a large number of databases can be effectively managed. And they need to improve the performance of the hardware.

We have between 10 and 15 teams using the solution. Each team's role is NOC support or SOC and, on the business team, there are people doing capacity analysis and people using it for reporting. For deployment and maintenance of the solution there are three or four involved, who are tool administrators.

We're using it fully in our organization. It's covering more than 90 percent. Increased usage depends on the infrastructure visibility. We may look at some expansion, but not immediately.

Their support team, during and since deployment, has been great; a nine out of 10. They stepped up whenever we required them, no matter what. They have provided feedback and support and have helped us.

nGeniusONE is the first solution we have used in this area.

I'm the architect of the complete solution. I ran the entire process from day one. I designed and deployed and have operated it, and it's a little bit complex. 

When we started doing the network deployment,the architecture, we needed to understand the enterprise architecture and where the main NETSCOUT deployment needed to capture it. It was not only in a specific area. It was all the applications relying on the packet data. It included on-premises, off-premises, remote sites, and cloud. It was capturing on a large, enterprise-level scale. We had to understand the architecture and then understand the application dependency then design the NETSCOUT solution accordingly. 

And, when rolling out everything, since it was not greenfield but brownfield, we needed to figure out the proper maintenance windows to not impact any of the production applications. Then we had to start educating the users how to use it and where to use it. After architecting it and deploying it, a large proportion of the focus was on bringing the users into the picture to make them familiar with the solution.

Deployment can take between six months and one year, in an environment like ours.

NETSCOUT provided some basic training through their portal, but since everything has gone live on the production system, we have also had some engagements with some of the NETSCOUT folks to get some assistance.

We have made on and off use of the NETSCOUT team. 

We save a lot of time. Before the solution was deployed, the teams used to spend more than a day on root cause analysis, and now they're spending only a couple of hours, and they're more aware of the next activities.

Licensing is flexible, it's not tied to anything else. We can easily switch up the licensing piece. Pricing is something that our budget team takes care of. Obviously, NETSCOUT is a little bit in the higher range, but it gives you value for money. You get what you pay for.

We did evaluate other solutions but NETSCOUT was better for our infrastructure.

With the visibility of the packet data, we can do whatever we need to do. It might be for the NOC or the SOC, but it helps our operations. We can dive into it and drill down into the information. Also, packet data was just packet data when we were using Wireshark, but when it comes to NetScout it provides business data as well. We can show actual numbers to the business team so they can understand and judge the quality of the network and the quality of the applications. We can show them solid proof with the data.

The automatic discovery and mapping of client-server relationships is a six or seven out of 10. It doesn't discover everything, but with it we do get some automatic discovery with the client-server. It doesn't get 100 percent of the data from the environment.

In terms of the dependency maps for visualizing the current state of the service and application environment, there are some limitations to the discovery maps due to our being a large enterprise. But if I focus on a small, specific area, it's great. It's able to discover the application dependencies and services dependencies, which have been used in that one, specific environment. For smaller areas, it's great, but for the larger portion of the infrastructure, it doesn't help a lot, so I need to break it down into individual areas.

The use case depends on the use case of the customer. For example, service providers will check the subscriber control plan or maybe the user input. However, banking customers might use it for their internet banking service.

The most valuable feature of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE is it helps customer to understand what risks are in their network. For example, if a customer has some wrong configurations. It could cost them some critical services to slow down.

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE can improve the detection of what area of the infrastructure could be having an issue, such as an application, server, or network. It needs to find evidence of a fault.

I have been using NETSCOUT nGeniusONE for approximately 10 years.

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE is stable.

The scalability of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE can be good but it depends on the customer's budget.

In my company, we have 12 people using the solutions.

Most of the support agents are good.

The initial setup of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE for enterprise is simple. It only takes one to two hours to complete. However, the time for the implementation can increase depending on the use case of the customer. For example, there are some proprietary customer applications or they have special network designs. We need to receive more information from customers to discuss it with them to decide how we can fine-tune the system.

For a service provider, it will be more complicated because in one total solution they will combine five or more NETSCOUT solutions inside.

For some customers, we need to work with them to receive many parts, such as some applications, which we will need to speak to the applications team. Additionally, there could be some services we need to monitor in the database, and in this case, we have to contact their database team.

We require more than two people for the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

My clients have received a return on investments and have expanded.

I rate the price of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE a four out of five.

My advice to others is if you need a solution to monitor your critical events or critical service based on an IP environment, then you must use this kind of solution

I rate NETSCOUT nGeniusONE a nine out of ten.